Liberal Forum

Cannonpointer » 25 Jul 2014 12:32 pm » wrote: I thought you only had two definitions of socialism, clemmie?

Now you toss out your eighth definition: Socialism is the condition of charging higher taxes than Singapore.

Wow, That is just extra special, clemmie. Every third post, you have another new definition of socialism - except when you're swearing that the word cannot be defined.

Are you really this utterly stupid?

Naaah, you're just lying.

Socialism has two definitions; control via outright state ownership of the economy or control via vast laws and regulation of an economy.

If a government collects half your salary via taxes, it "OWNS" half your salary and collects it through law.

That's so clear even a psychotic can understand it.

And given how broadly Socialism intrudes on citizens' lives, there are many ways to measure the degree of Socialism.

What about the poverty, the brutality, the human rights abuses, Clem?

"The bad stuff? There's no socialism in Singapore, except for just enough to do all that bad stuff, and not one bit more. Other than that, it's totally freedomy - now with new "economic freedom" freedom - the most elite and exclusive freedom to date!"

That's as stupid as complaining in a math class that they're not teaching English.

Do you want Heritage's or my opinion about civil rights and social freedoms? Then read Heritage's statements about them.

Or ask me about mine, rather than lying about both of us.

You haven't written one single word against the genocide China committed in Tibet.

Therefore, by your silence you supported it.

See, anyone can play that silly troll trick.